'iPhone 6s' Could Have 2GB of RAM and Pre-Installed Apple SIM

Why more RAM? I thought 1GB was enough? Or at least that's what I read whenever someone complained that the iPad Air reloaded tabs.

Will we reach 16gb RAM before we end 16gb storage?

Cool, maybe then one can multitask between, say, Google Maps and Safari – without Safari having to reload the tabs every single time (like on my iPhone 6 Plus).

I don't believe anyone ever said that 1 GB was enough. What they said was that Apple wasn't including so little to be cheap but for other reasons such as battery life and that the tradeoff may well be worth it.

Lots of people said 1GB was enough and people who complained were dismissed on a regular basis by some. Apple knows what they are doing, iOS doesn't need more RAM, why would you want to have 3 tabs open, etc. etc.

1GB is not enough

I have never owned an Android phone and could probably be considered somewhat of an Apple fanboy.

Let us be clear on one point: 1 GB of ram for a smartphone in today's mobile computing environment is not enough. It is not even close to enough. No amount of optimization by Apple can get around the fact that today's complex and robust applications need an ever increasing amount of RAM.

Apple did a great job of pushing mobile apps to the masses, but they have not built a platform that is capable of executing these apps in a seamless way.

I own an iPhone 6 and when I switch between apps, which I do frequently, I expect that the save state of the previous app will be lost EVERY SINGLE TIME, because that's usually what happens.

This is unacceptable. If they had an iPhone 6++ released last October that had 4GB of ram in it I would have paid $1-200 extra for it. The phone feels crippled as it is right now.

If this rumor is true (and I suspect that it is) I will likely upgrade again. So I guess Apple wins. But I'm not happy about it.

There was a time when 500 mb or even half of that was enough. My iPhone with 1gb of RAM has performed far better then other devices I have used with at least twice as much RAM. This increased RAM would be for future devices and iOS. And yes, for many who are not into spec craze, currently 1GB of RAM is enough.

Thanks for proving my point.

You won't see me getting a new iPhone without it featuring at least 2GB of RAM.
I've had enough of the "iOS is optimized" talk.
Yes it is, but you can only optimize so much.

Glassed Silver:mac

I love it. Apple comes out with phabllet and times changes. Apple increases ram,time changes again.

Funny though how a lot of "our" opinions shift right with what Apple is offering now or is likely to be offering soon. I have seen passionate arguments about 1GB being plenty. Since that is what Apple offers right now, you can look through this thread and see people still arguing that. And since this rumor implies Apple is going to 2GB, you can see other people arguing how great that will be.

At one point, "we" argued 3.5" was a perfect screen size and all the other, larger-screens were "abominations", "stupid", "need special pants with bigger pockets", "man purses" and "fragmentation". Then, Apple went to 4" and a changed aspect ratio which introduced fragmentation and it was "shut up and take my money" and all other sizes were "abominations" , "stupid" and "99% don't want a phablet", etc. Then, Apple went bigger and again, "shut up and take my money", "best iPhone ever", etc. Where does all that passion against whatever Apple doesn't offer now go when Apple does roll out their incarnation of it? And where are those special pants with bigger pockets and man purses?

NFC was a "joke", a "gimmick", "why would anyone ever want to" and so on before Apple implemented it. Then, it was "I'm boycotting stores that won't accept Apple Pay" and a flurry of demands that other stores and banks get on board or risk losing "my" business. So was it really a joke or only a joke until Apple would incorporate it?

720p was "good enough" when :apple:TV 2 was the current model (even when pretty much everything else had long since gone 1080p). "1080p is a gimmick", "until everyone everywhere has the bandwidth", "the chart", and so on was slung to no end against those who longed for a 1080p :apple:TV. Then, Apple rolled out a 1080p version and all those passionate pro-720p arguments just evaporated.

Retina was "must have" on an iPad but not necessary for the iPad Mini (first generation) when that was the way Apple chose to roll both out. A 9.7" screen had to be retina but a 7.9" screen did not need it. "We" argued passionately for retina and against retina at the same time as it fit the split as Apple offered both. Then, when mini 2 rolled out with retina, all that had argued how a 7.9" screen didn't need retina vanished... or "evolved with the times".

An iSight camera in gen 1 iPad made absolutely no sense and those who wanted it were "stupid" and "trolls": "why would anyone want to look up my nose while I video chat?", "you would get dizzy from the instability" and on and on. Then Apple rolls out iPad 2 keying around FaceTime and it was "shut up and take my money", "can't wait to FaceTime", etc.

How "we" rationalize all that flip flopping is one of two ways: either we 1) ignore it as if "we" never argued against whatever change Apple just made or we 2) try to spin some variation of "evolving with the changing times." #2 has some merit but it's funny how "our" views will tend to evolve right along with exactly whatever Apple decides they want to push now or soon. It would seem that someone who could make a passionate argument about 1GB being plenty, or "720p is good enough" or 3.5" or 4" is "perfect" would continue to feel that way even if Apple switched to something they've previously bashed to no end. But we don't. Instead, "we" will magically evolve right in line with exactly what Apple chooses to offer now or likely soon.

It's "stupid" while Apple doesn't offer it but then it's "shut up and take my money" when they do. One might argue that Apple is simply amazing at delivering exactly what "we" want right when our wants "evolve with the times" but others might argue the many variants of iSheep... that Apple could roll out iPoop and it would be "shut up and take my money" and "I'm already in line" and "best poop ever".

Step back to barely a year before NFC or when the first rumors of bigger-screen iPhones hit and you'll see tremendous bashing of both with plenty of "go buy Android, troll" for those who dared to express desire for what would soon come. Then the rumors pile up and "we" start to believe Apple really is going to change into the "abominations" and our view tends to become "wait and see" or "can't wait". Then Apple announces and it's "Shut up and take my money" and "best <innovation> ever"... even over the course of as little as 1 year. Amazing how Apple knows what we will want right when we'll want it... or iSheep who will want whatever Apple decides to roll out.

Myself? 1GB has long been too little for iDevices. Except for the money made by key strategic partners on burning data with lots of reloading, it's in the realm of ridiculous to have a 64bit multitasking OS for a couple of years constrained by only 1GB. Glad to see that Apple might be finally stepping this up. I wonder if all those who have passionately argued how 1GB is plenty, "lazy programmers", "battery burn" and so on will still be arguing those things against Apple when Apple rolls out a 2GB iPhone? (rhetorical- see many examples above)

I don't believe anyone ever said that 1 GB was enough. What they said was that Apple wasn't including so little to be cheap but for other reasons such as battery life and that the tradeoff may well be worth it.

Wow. Something doesnt add up though. If I have so little ram that switching between 2 tabs reloads the tab every time, then wouldnt that mean that I am using my LTE radio which consumes considerably more battery than ram for all those reloads?

Also, wouldnt the time spent reloading the tabs also mean that whatever I am doing takes more time to do, hence increasing necessary screen-on-time?

more like "should have 2gb of ram"